Posted 09 March 2013 - 01:32 PM

Posted 09 March 2013 - 07:28 PM

Riley Freeman

InsanelyMac Deity

Members

1,513 posts

Gender:Male

Location:The Streets

For the record, OpenCL works for me with no patching.10.8.2, latest Nvidia drivers, EVGA vanilla GTX 660 2GB.

I can confirm this too. I had the libclh.dylib patched for my GTX460. After upgrading to the 670 I had to do an additional patch on the OpenCL framework because the card has over 2GB RAM. I've reverted libclh to the unpatched copy and OpenCL still works fine.

Posted 15 March 2013 - 12:41 AM

Riley Freeman

InsanelyMac Deity

Members

1,513 posts

Gender:Male

Location:The Streets

Just installed 10.8.3. Got a bit of a boost in my FPS (up from 494.8 last time). Also it seems I no longer need to patch the OpenCL.framework to enable my 4GB card. So that means OpenCL now works fully OOTB here.

Posted 15 March 2013 - 07:19 AM

mitch_de

InsanelyMacaholic

Retired

3,025 posts

Gender:Male

Location:Stuttgart / Germany

Thanks, also AMD OpenCL drivers got updated - so you be free to check some diffs. But as for every bench, only significant >3% diff may happen by the update.1-3% % fps diff also happens between two runs on same system.PS: New Bench version has AA OF by default, older versions uses AA ON, doesnt matter for fast gpus (had >> 100 fps in old version) but slower cards have up to 10% less fps with AA ON (default in old version) vs AA OF (default in new version.

Posted 15 March 2013 - 11:16 AM

mitch_de

InsanelyMacaholic

Retired

3,025 posts

Gender:Male

Location:Stuttgart / Germany

Thanks, we see that AA doesnt matter running this bench on fast gpus. This OpenCL Code seems to perform a bit faster on Nvidia Highend vs. AMD Highend. But doesnt matter - other OpenCL benches, whith different OpenCL code will have other ranking list of the highend gpus.At least great steps forward compared to AMD 4870 & AMD 5870 Mac in case of OpenCL (here and Luxmark).How doest the AMD 7950 perform OpenCL ? I guess at around 85%-90% speed of 7970?

Time to bring the new Saphirre 7950 Mac Edition to the market (for real MacPros) - hope they will see the card normal and not only by Apple in there shop.

Posted 15 March 2013 - 10:43 PM

Posted 16 March 2013 - 05:32 AM

mitch_de

InsanelyMacaholic

Retired

3,025 posts

Gender:Male

Location:Stuttgart / Germany

Thanks for 4870 result - we see that comapred to the 4890 GPU result, posted a few post above, the PCIe transferspeed is much higher.
Something is wrong with the PCIe Slot & or the Card of the 4890 User, because he reaches only AGP speed (first two bandwidth results are very low , << 1 GB)
In general he will not "see"/ "feel" that major bottleneck, because it only comes up if huge or very often data transfers happens. IN Games when textures for a new scene get updated or VRAM mem runs near out of mem ((90% VRAM used) or using OpenCL huge data is transfered. In OceanWave data transfer isnt high, so the PCIe bandwidth doenst matter for slower cards.
I gues that the 4890 GPU with <= 0,2 GB/s PCIe Speed (vs >> 2 GB/s) will have more FPS drops (lower minimal FPS) , some minimal freezes in Valley OpenGL bench than the 4870 running higher res with high quality setting.

Posted 16 March 2013 - 12:24 PM

mitch_de

InsanelyMacaholic

Retired

3,025 posts

Gender:Male

Location:Stuttgart / Germany

OceanWAve may run in probs with more than one OpenCL gpu. Try Luxmark instead - should work to select the benched GPUs there.
Can you try to disable HD4000 (in BIOS?) and run again if there is not an general prob with Wave & your GPU/System?

Posted 16 March 2013 - 12:56 PM

Badeendje

InsanelyMac Sage

Members

259 posts

What I did notice is with multisampling on my results are all over the place (50 fps difference between lowest and highest values).However without multisampling or fullscreen it's almost constant with 5 fps difference at most...Interestingly full screen with multisampling on is 50 fps difference again... but stable this time.So it must be the windowing which gives unreliable results.Again this setup has been pretty stable for 2 years and over the past 1 or so benches have become really stable for this card.

Posted 16 March 2013 - 01:07 PM

Attached Files

Posted 16 March 2013 - 01:45 PM

mitch_de

InsanelyMacaholic

Retired

3,025 posts

Gender:Male

Location:Stuttgart / Germany

What I did notice is with multisampling on my results are all over the place (50 fps difference between lowest and highest values).However without multisampling or fullscreen it's almost constant with 5 fps difference at most...Interestingly full screen with multisampling on is 50 fps difference again... but stable this time.So it must be the windowing which gives unreliable results.Again this setup has been pretty stable for 2 years and over the past 1 or so benches have become really stable for this card.

What exact AMD 79xx do you have - AMD mostly reports not the Type number, only Type group (79xx).

Its normal that MIN/MAX Fps have an difference and not "stable" - the interesting values is MAX - MIN depends on CPU & other things which may reduce FPS at the first 1-2 seconds of running. IN this first start section the MIN fps always happens. After at max 5 sec actual and MAX value are stable.

That fullscreen MIN/MAX has less diff is also normal, because fps is much lower - depends on screen size - which do you have, because in that version i dont report screensize beside fullscreen comment. I will add that screen size in next version. Running that bench in fullscreen has many disadvantages to bench OpenCL :1. Much more OpenGL power is used by the gpu to render the result = much less gpu power left for OpenCL. Even the small window uses some of the gpus OpenGL power.At least slow -midrange gpus dropping fps very much using fullscreen in >= 1600x1080 vs 500x500 windowed. OpenGL part, which renders the waves uses 7 times more gpu power in that example!2. screensize does matter much: same gpu with 1400x900 & 1900x1200 has much diff in fps3. so fullscreen is interesting but not very useable as OpenCL bench

Also next version will add some AMD special: If AMD driver reports no GPU number, only XYZ Type i will allow the user to select fitting GPU numerbs for that type, like7950, 7970,....

Posted 16 March 2013 - 02:14 PM

Badeendje

InsanelyMac Sage

Members

259 posts

It's a HIS 6870, haven't decided on upgrading yet as I haven't gotten my brothers 7870 working yet with sleep.

But without multisampling max and also min(!) is stable, keep getting the exact same results within 3 FPS.
However with multisampling on, I get greatly different results for both min and max.
So far other benches have proven more reliable for me, that's the only thing I wanted to communicate to begin with